Movement hopes to end lifetime ban on gay blood donors

Mike Enos used to roll up his sleeve and donate blood with his co-workers. But that stopped years ago after he was ushered behind a privacy curtain at an office blood drive and told his blood wouldn't be accepted.

Ever.

That's because Enos, a Kansas City insurance executive, is gay.

For decades, the federal government has imposed a lifetime ban on blood donations from men who have had sex with men. The reason is that the AIDS virus, HIV, can be spread through blood transfusions, and gay men are more likely to carry HIV than the general population.

But increasingly refined tests are removing many of the doubts about whether a blood donor carries HIV.

So a movement is under way to end the lifetime ban and bring the rules for gay blood donors more in line with restrictions placed on other potentially risky donors.

A leading gay men's health organization is calling for a rewrite of federal regulations on blood donations so that all risky behaviors -- gay and heterosexual -- are treated the same.

And a group of 18 U.S. senators, led by John Kerry, wrote last month to the Food and Drug Administration, the agency that regulates the nation's blood supply, to review what they called "outdated, medically and scientifically unsound deferral criteria" that exclude gay donors.

The FDA said it is "actively engaged in re-examining the issue of blood donor deferral" among gay men.

"Taking into account the current body of scientific information ÃÂ we are considering the possibility of pursuing alternative strategies that maintain blood safety," a recent FDA statement said.

A Health and Human Services advisory committee on blood safety and availability plans to review the issue in June.

It's about time, Enos said.

"Bottom line, the blood supply has to be kept safe, but isolating a sexual orientation doesn't ensure that it's any safer," Enos said.

Enos has been in a monogamous relationship for nearly five years. He's HIV-free and gets tested for the virus every year. He said he would donate blood again, if given the opportunity.

"I feel I'm being isolated unfairly," Enos said.

Donor rules affecting gay men date to the earliest years of the AIDS epidemic, when public health officials noticed that the disease was appearing among hemophiliacs and others who received blood transfusions. Ultimately, thousands of people would die with AIDS contracted from contaminated blood.

In 1983, blood collection facilities began telling potential donors to refrain voluntarily from giving blood if they were in any of the groups at high risk of AIDS infection. That included sexually active gay and bisexual men who had multiple partners.

But the rule for gay men was progressively broadened and now excludes blood donations by all men who have had sex with another man, even one time, since 1977, the year HIV is believed to have reached the United States.

Questionnaires that every potential donor must answer are used to screen out men who have had sex with men and other people who may be carrying blood-borne diseases such as hepatitis B.

Meanwhile, increasingly accurate tests have been developed to detect HIV in donor blood. The first tests that became available spot antibodies that the immune system produces when confronted by HIV. It usually takes two to eight weeks, but sometimes longer, for the body to make enough antibodies for the tests to detect.

A newer test can find HIV itself in the blood. This test shortens the time between infection with the virus and detection to nine to 11 days.

With this technology in place, the FDA estimates that less than one in 1 million HIV-infected donors go undetected.

Sympathy for gay men believed to be unfairly excluded from giving blood has led to boycotts and cancellations of blood drives on university campuses.

But health experts also have raised objections.

Blood-banking organizations have long called for rolling back the deferral period on blood donations by gay men to one year after their most recent sexual contact with another man.

That's the same deferral period used for people who have had sex with a prostitute or heterosexual contact with someone who is HIV-positive.

"We understand there are emotions attached to this, but policies should be science-based," said James AuBuchon, president-elect of AABB, formerly known as the American Association of Blood Banks.

"I wouldn't even want to say there would be any additional risk (with a one-year deferral)," he said.

But a one-year deferral may not yield many gay blood donors either, AuBuchon conceded. That would amount to a year of celibacy before a sexually active gay male could give blood.

"Which is ludicrous," Enos said. "They just as well might stick with the ban on gay men."

The group GMHC, or Gay Men's Health Crisis, is encouraging the FDA to consider creating one set of standards with a shorter deferral period for all potential donors based on their sexual activity.

That may mean turning away any donor who has had sex in the past six months with more than one person, or had sex with someone who is HIV-positive or has had multiple sex partners.

But it also may increase the donor pool by attracting men to blood banks who had been previously excluded while keeping the blood supply safe, said Nathan Schaefer, GMHC director of public policy.

"The current policy doesn't make sense," Schaefer said. "It's not based in science. It's archaic, and it limits the number of donors."